> 1. Mature product compared to MySQL.
> 2. Supports triggers, stored procedures, cursors.
> 3. Also supports foreign key constrains which I believe are only
> supported in MySQL beta at this time.
You cannot exist as a real human being unless you have foreign keys :)
> 4. A true object relational database, which should mesh well with PHP5's
> new beefed up object model.
I don't think it will make much difference really.
> 5. Avoids the complexities and ambiguities in licensing from which
> MySQL seems to suffer.
> PostGreSQL cons:
> 1. My impression based on what I've seen written is that PHP/MySQL
> integration is better. After all, while people talk of LAMP, one does
> not ever hear of LAPP. However, looking over the functions available
> for each in PHP5, I don't see obvious evidence of this.
Yeah, it's a just silly myth. I do heaps of PHP/PostgreSQL coding.
> 2. Administration is more difficult. I read this in the "PHP5 MySQL
> Bible" but from what little I've seen for myself, I don't really see the
> difference. I did note a couple of things in the recent LWN article on
> PostgreSQL. 7.5 will introduce direct import of CSV files, and the
> direct renaming of columns, which I believe are things that have been
> long supported in MySQL. Not show stoppers, of course, but they do hint
> at PostgreSQL perhaps not being as convenient to use as MySQL. Then
> again, I recognize that this is a perception based on little evidence.
7.5 will be able to alter column TYPE, not column name. However, since
MySQL has to copy your entire table to do things like adding an index,
dropping a column, etc. which PostgreSQL can do in O(1) time for
dropping a col for instance, then maybe it's postgres that's more
> 3. I prefer MySQL's phpmyadmin to the command line for working with the
> database. I have heard that phppgadmin is not as feature complete.
> However, looking over my recent installation, I don't see glaring
I'm the lead developer of phpPgAdmin and I can guarantee you that
phpPgAdmin has ten times the features of phpMyAdmin, basically because
PostgreSQL has 10 times the features of MySQL.
> 4. MySQL is more multiplatform. While this does not bother me, I do
> have coworkers that use Windows that will be affected by my choice of
> database. Fortunately, I believe 7.5 is to have true (i.e. non-cygwin
> win32 support).
Well, PostgreSQL runs on far more platforms than MySQL, it's just that
until 7.5 (beta this week), it didn't run natively on windows.
> 5. Performance. Here it seems almost impossible to get solid
> information, and what little there is out there seems quite dated. My
> general impression is that under light load and simple queries, MySQL is
> more nimble, but that under heavier, multi-user load more complex
> queries PostgreSQL pulls ahead. This is based on hear-say and I get the
> distinct impression that no one really knows, or at least no one ever
> seems to present numbers to back them up. I also understand that it can
> be difficult to make an apples to apples comparison due to the feature
> disparity between the two, which was quite vast until recent times
> (MySQL's 4.x series).
Performance is fine on both servers really. PostgreSQL is fast enough
for any purpose, including simple queries. Of course I believe
PostgreSQL allows you to optimize in ways that MySQL users can only
dream of. eg. stored procs, prepared queries, triggers, rules,
functiones, custom aggregates, operators, index methods, partial
indexes, expressional indexes, etc.
Just use PostgreSQL - trust me on this!
In response to
pgsql-advocacy by date
|Next:||From: Dennis Bjorklund||Date: 2004-08-02 05:34:22|
|Subject: Re: New to PostgreSQL|
|Previous:||From: Scott Marlowe||Date: 2004-08-02 01:17:45|
|Subject: Re: New to PostgreSQL|